Remember the bridge that was supposed to be out, but Sean decided to try it anyway. The TIV2 weaved its way around the road closed signs and crosses the bridge in that heavy piece of junk. Well, I know where that was and I know the county commisioner in charge of building that bridge.
The bridge was not ready for traffic yet and wouldn't have been for many more days because THE CONCRETE WASN'T DONE CURING! Now, thanks to Sean's TIV2, the engineers and inspectors failed the final inspection because of some damage to the bridge when that idiot decided to just drive all over the backs of the people of the county. Sean the narcissist basicall said, "Screw the people; they can build another bridge; these signs don't pertain to us; we're storm chasers and are above the law."
You don't think so? You don't think Sean operates above the law? Remember last season when there was a tornado near I-70 near Quinter (I think, correct me if I'm wrong)? Sean ordered his driver to drive on the shoulder against the flow of oncoming traffic, going at least 65 mph or so. Big semis, rv's, and cars whizzing by only a few feet away while the poor, white-knuckled driver was tensely creeping his way back down the road, watching the oncoming cars like death sentences. Then he went down the wrong was on an entrance ramp, making another car pull off until they got by, all the while the nervous driver apologetically waiving to each blaring horn that signalled another offended person.
So now, with this bridge damage, he has forced the folks in Stephens County to pay another 18,000 in tax dollars to repair a bridge that hasn't even been used yet...except by Sean.
SEAN CAN DO WHATEVER HE THINKS HE CAN. I HOPE TO SEE HIM ON OUR PROPERTY IN WESTERN, KS. I'D LIKE TO GIVE HIM AN EARFUL!
Yeah I'm sure the TIV ruined your bridge. Maybe your county department of roads should learn to use barricades. It's not that difficult. If the bridge wasn't setup, why wasn't access to it blocked off? Seems like a public liability to me. Signs should never be a stand alone barrier. Kansas for ya.
Yeah I'm sure the TIV ruined your bridge. Maybe your county department of roads should learn to use barricades. It's not that difficult. If the bridge wasn't setup, why wasn't access to it blocked off? Seems like a public liability to me. Signs should never be a stand alone barrier. Kansas for ya..
The episode, and bridge, took place in Texas. But thanks for the stereotype "Dr."
Could the Discovery Channel be held liable for the damages? Now that there is video "proof" of the deed being done, perhaps the county can go after those responsible.
Originally posted by ksfarmgirl90: Could the Discovery Channel be held liable for the damages? Now that there is video "proof" of the deed being done, perhaps the county can go after those responsible.
You're making a rather bold assumption that the OP has any idea what he's talking about. If the bridge could have been damaged by someone driving across it, they should have taken some steps to prevent someone from driving across it beyond a sign. How about some orange barrels or a barricade? Also, not taking appropriate steps to protect someone from driving on an unsafe bridge doesn't seem too smart either.
Ok if you where watching the show the sign said bridge close (LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY) so the bridge was cured enough for pass throught traffic. And where it was located at Im sure that bridge sees a lot of farm vehicles that weigh way more than the TIV2, Just because you saw the TIV2 drive over that bridge dont mean they cause the damage, Your just looking for someone to blame
Originally posted by Laganm21: Ok if you where watching the show the sign said bridge close (LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY) so the bridge was cured enough for pass throught traffic. And where it was located at Im sure that bridge sees a lot of farm vehicles that weigh way more than the TIV2, Just because you saw the TIV2 drive over that bridge dont mean they cause the damage, Your just looking for someone to blame
Just a FYI. That's not what "local traffic" means. It means traffic local before you come to the bridge.
Just a FYI. That's not what "local traffic" means. It means traffic local before you come to the bridge.
Then it should say "Local Traffic Only Before You Come To The Bridge". :-)
Anyways, quit moaning people. The bridge should have been barricaded. Highly doubtful the TIV was the only one to cross it. As far as "tearing up the roads in Texas", like there is no body else who drives down a dirt/mud/clay road when it is wet? You have too much time to think about ways to complain. Kind of like my wife... When Ive gone in the ditch, you think I stop and say, " call a tow truck".. I try to get out too.. Everyone does. Its not like they were sitting their, intentially off-roading..
Sean did however "dominate" that rainbow, so why isnt anyone giving him kudos for that?
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mod_ivy,
Dominate the rainbow!!! If TIV goes down for ruining the bridge, then the state will have to prove that not one other person drove over it at all during the days it was closed, but not barricaded.
I used to work for a bridge company back in the late 1980's ( King Construction from Hesston Ks) Anytime we had a bridge waiting to cure, the abutments (the ends of the bridge that the road approached on) were not backfilled with dirt until the bridge had proper curing time whcih was usually about 2 weeks. By not backfilling , it would make it impossible to cross the bridge with any vehicle. Once we had backfilled the abutments we would be able to drive on with our winchtruck to load equipment etc.... even tho the bridge may not have been open to the public, it was safe to cross without causing any damage.
Another thing that makes me believe that the bridge had ample curing time was the fact that the handrails were complete on both sides of the bridge. Those rails take quite a while to form up, tie in steel and pour concrete then cure before the forms can be removed, giving the deck even more time to cure out.
From what I could see in the footage of the show, it appeared to me that the bridge was completed and just awaiting official opening. It's highly unlikely that the TIV crossing the bridge would have caused any damage.
sounds to me like tntdie is making all of this up! does he hate the tiv guys that much to try to make an elaborate (but obviously full of holes) story?
Okay, some good objections have been made here, but some were not so good. I will do my best to clarify and/or respond.
First, ksphotoguy has some really good observations and subsequent questions, so I am gonna call him again tomorrow and ask him about those. I do want to ask the ksphotoguy if he thinks the heavy, constant rainfall could have contributed to the inadequate curing. Again, the observations made by ksphotoguy were really insighful and kind of made me wonder if I got the full story. I do know that the commissioner thought that it was the TVN crew that crossed it, and he accused them of the chicanery. Clearly, though, it was the TIV2 who crossed the bridge.
So it is the county's fault that Sean ignored the clear and lawful signs that said not to cross the bridge? It's like saying it's a bank's fault for being robbed because they kept money in the vault rather than the robber who took it. And, speaking of the signs, the bridge was not marked with little signs the size of most speed limit signs. The barricades that TIV drove around are half-a-roadway wide; they are about 6 feet tall and they say Bridge Out all over them. Also, just to finally finish off this rediculous proposition, the entire area has orange barrels , huge signs, barricade signs, and detour signs. What else kind of deterrents do you think they should've done?
First of all, admittedly, it is coincidental that I should happen to know a commissioner in that county. . But, I think I can get my hands on a newspaper clipping of the first commissioner's meeting that discusses it.
Here is my secret, as well as most of the other viewers: WE READ THE SIGN! It said that Texas Farm Road 717 was closed .4 miles ahead and the bridge was out. And I don't know where you're from, but Stephens county is a rural area, and rural areas just don't build all that many bridges at once, especially on any particular highway. If you're from a city, maybe you'd presume that there are multiples hundreds of bridges, but it just ain't so in those parts. So, it's not crazy to know just which bridge they were talking about.
Some doubted whether the Tiv would have damaged the bridge, but don't foget that Sean said the thing weighs 15,000 pounds.
Also, most local folk, like farmers and such, try not to drive on those roads when they are muddy. They don't like driving in ruts for the next month until it rains again. So, yeah, those guys who tear up those roads do probably irritate the local folk.
The objection raised regarding local traffic was sufficiently debunked. Nice job!
Lastly, here is the real issue, which is largely missed. It isn't whether Sean is responsible for the bridge repairs needed to make the final inspection. It isn't whther he damaged the bridge. Here is the real issue which cannot be disproven: Sean has little if any regard whatsoever for the communities through which he goes tearing in the divine name of IMAX. He sat on the roadside and thought about it, then decided to go down the road. The lawful signs telling him he was prohibited from so doing had no effect on him at all. He didn't consider whether he thought he should break the law. That was a given. His only decision was whether or not he could get his shot. Just like the stunt he pulled along I-70, driving against traffic on the shoulder. Somebody could've easily been killed who doesn't give a damn about Sean's IMAX film.
As I said, I will call again. If I'm wrong or if I'm right shouldn't matter (but I sure as heck didn't make this up). What matters is that [he] exploits anyone he has to for something as trivial as a $6.00 movie ticket. Maybe next time, he won't drive over a restricted bridge against the law. This last time, he happened to do it to someone I know, and, yes, it ticked me off too. Each time he pulls that , he is doing it to someone's loved one. I hate it that others do similar things like drive irradically, but at least they have a somewhat altruistic reason for it in their research efforts (some clearly more than others), but still, the hypocrisy is stunning that is shown by the researchers conducting data-gathering to enhance safety while risking other lives. At least, though, maybe the researchers will save lives, but Sean's IMAX can surely make no such claim and cannot, therefore, justify his recklessness.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mod_ivy,
The constant rainfall should not have been a concern to the curing of the bridge deck. Once we had completed a deck pour, we covered the surface with burlap then which we sprayed with water and covered the wet burlap with plastic which were then held in place with 2x8's. If anything, the rain would have helped in the curing process by cooling the concrete and keeping the moisture from escaping too quickly from the concrete. Heat and fast drying will cause problems for the curing concrete. We typically would let the deck cure for two weeks after the deck pour, then we would strip out the falsework from under the bridge deck, and then we would begin work on the handrails. By the time we had the handrails completed, the deck would have had about a month to cure out.
Okay, another response for some of you: ksphotoguy, thanks for the further input. You certainly seem to know what you're talking about, and I wonder if I was told the facts. I wonder how a bridge as short as that one could have been damaged by something even as heavy as the TIV. The bridge was maybe two carlengths long. Anyway, I pasted ur posts into an email to the commissioner and am waiting for a reply. I did notice that although the bridge had concrete railings about 18" high, there weren't any handrails constructed on top of them. When you say handrails, do you mean adding something on top of the concrete rails? Thanks for your input again. All I am after is the truth, and dialoguing with you has helped. Your post stands in stark contrast to someone on here who can only poke at the notion that TV shows don't occur in a vacuum. WXCHASER28, You got me! I am Richard Henne! But here's where you're all messed up. 1. This was filmed May 5, so you'd have to look further back than a month. 2. Although the meeting agendas are published by the county, the meeting minutes are not, so you do not know what was actually covered at the meeting. 3. Certain issues are not ever published, including issues pertaining to contracts, so keep on Google searching. You won't find it. That's why I will try to get the newspaper reference because parts of the meetings may be attended by the public and/or press. 4. If the bridge was "completed" as you say, why were there two huge, orange and white, signed barricades blocking the way? Why did the TIV drive around those two signs (that read "ROAD CLOSED" "BRIDGE OUT AHEAD" "OBSERVE WARNING SIGNS: STATE LAW") on the road, as well as that big yellow road-grader? Why did both teams stop and consider what to do when they saw the sign? Completion of the bridge would include the removal of those wouldn't it? 5. The "locals" are far, far different than the TIV for one big reason: they paid the taxes to build it. 6. If you don't "buy my story", why are you "spending" your time even reading it, let alone responding? (That goes for expodis too.) STEREODUDE, you could be right that the bridge was FUBAR before it was ever crossed. I am thinking about calling the contractor to ask about it if I don't hear back from the commissioner soon.
But, the larger issue still is that Sean was wrong for crossing the bridge. Can anyone justify him doing what he did so that he could make an IMAX movie?
I'm still not convinced. Why was it so easy to drive over? I didn't see blockades in the show. They were gambling that the sign was in error and it looked to be a good bet! I still think you are stirring up trouble, your story is a bunch of "I know a guy who said...". So, until there is actual proof of records or quotes or something, I'm going to regard this as more message board mumbo jumbo.
I think it would be hard to pinpoint what caused "the bridge not to pass inspection". I'm sure there were more vehicles behind and in front of the TIV also. But it was his call.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: mod_ivy,
No one here has addressed the original point. Whether or not TIV2 caused any damage to the bridge, the point is that Sean chose to break the law in order to get his shot. It doesn't matter that there were no barricades at the ends of the bridge, Sean and his crew drove around large and clearly marked barricades at the main highway to get where he wanted to go. He exhibited selfish disregard for local laws, and this is not the first time. You notice that Reed and his team chose to obey the laws.
MYTHDUSTERLUVR, if you watched carefully, you can see signs at US hiway 180 saying the road is closed. Then when they turn and go south on TFH 717, there are two very large white and orange signs as well as a large yellow road grader. Sean's team had to drive around and behind all of this to get to the bridge. It's all there very clearly.
Here is the issue: do you think Sean exhibits adequate respect for the interests of others? Say whatever you wish about all of the periphery, but until that point is addressed, objections to my question fall flat.
I've got to agree with TNT here to a point. I can't prove or disprove whether Sean actually damaged that bridge. But even if he didn't, he did the wrong thing by crossing that bridge.
I'm relatively certain that not only were the signs up, but there were two barriers, those orange and white lines reflective stands across the road that Sean drove around. It was clear the bridge should not have been crossed but he did it anyway. Not the right thing to do IMO.
Originally posted by Phant: Any of you people see the sign said "Local traffic only"...which is prolly why he chose to go across...you people argue about the silliest things.
you do realize that local traffic only means all traffic that needs to use the road locally BEFORE you get to the bridge. Any traffic that needed to get to the other side of the bridge was supposed to go another way, thats the same sign says the bridge is out.
You have to wonder if some of the ones that reply on the message board are old enough to drive.
I still have not seen any proof posted to the board about the Damage that has been accused by Sean's TIV and the Discovery crew to the bridge.
Would some that live in that area post some links to find the Damage report "the engineers and inspectors failed the final inspection because of some damage to the bridge when that idiot decided to just drive all over the backs of the people of the county"
Many need to remember that each County and state have their own versions on rules for construction of New bridge work and are allowed to display the signs we saw on the show.
I've been around several new bridges during construction in the last couple of years to agree with ksphotoguy comments. Many forget that a Construction service truck probably weighs as much or more that 15,000 lbs
Do you believe that the road grading equipment was carried around the new bridge or crossed the new bridge?
Still - the TIV and Discovery crew both went across the bridge and for some reason only a part of it was shown, The signs were clear.
Someone prove it already. We've heard more on the side of TIV doing nothing wrong than they made a mistake. It's just another lame reason to go after sean. I bet it's total bogus.
I'm not saying that he was right by going around the barricades. I am well aware of the disregard that occurs when the chase is on. The I-70 Quinter incident is proof of that.
I am only saying what I know of bridge construction and timeframes for concrete curing from my past employment on a bridge crew. When I use the term handrails, I am referring to the concrete side rails of the bridge.
From the facts that I see in the footage of the bridge, it was very close to being opened and the TIV driving across would not have caused any damage by merely driving across.
no argument from me ks...there's a bridge under construction in my hometown presently and if I were to try and drive down the road, the road ends before the bridge begins. I'm gonna drive into a 7 foot hole. I doubt he damaged the bridge.
The 70 move was interseting but i also wonder if the editing did it justice or mad it look worse than it was. If you watched the bast storms special you see on of the guys say there is a tornado crossing the road why wpould anyone continue driving. So i bet the road was safely empty. The bridge was clearly open and safe. Any road crew concerned with damage would have blocked it beyond question. If there is an article proving it was damaged ill eat my words but even then i could not be pinned to tiv. Whoever started this thread just has it out for tiv.
Holy heck, someone in hollywood didn't do the morally correct thing...someone call the FBI. I wonder if the producers of the show would be so careless as to broadcast proof of their show not only breaking the law, but having that illegal activity lead to some kind of fiscal liability? I really cant comment on the structural capacity of the bridge in question, and I don't believe that anyone (even in showbusiness) is above the law. But does anyone else wonder why the show would not edit out any illegal activities that could lead to litigious actions against the show, its production team, and the network?
If the Bridge wasnt done "curing" then why was it open? Who cares if theres a bridge out sign if the bridge is open and it looked safe i would have drove over it to. if they didnt want anyone driving on it and "damaging" it then why wasnt the bridge Blocked off?
The OP really needs to find a hobby or something else to occupy their time, I hear storm chasing is good fun.
Seriously though I don't see what the issue is here, the fact that you know where the bridge is or the county commisioner in charge of building it is irrelevant. This is a forum board for people to chat about a TV show, not a channel for lodging a legal complaint.
The way I see it if you have a legitimate claim, then you should file that with the appropriate authorities. I see no reason for you to be calling contractors or launching your own investigation. File your complaint and then it will be investigated, thats how things work.
But here's where you're all messed up. 1. This was filmed May 5, so you'd have to look further back than a month. 2. Although the meeting agendas are published by the county, the meeting minutes are not, so you do not know what was actually covered at the meeting. 3. Certain issues are not ever published, including issues pertaining to contracts, so keep on Google searching. You won't find it. That's why I will try to get the newspaper reference because parts of the meetings may be attended by the public and/or press. 4. If the bridge was "completed" as you say, why were there two huge, orange and white, signed barricades blocking the way? Why did the TIV drive around those two signs (that read "ROAD CLOSED" "BRIDGE OUT AHEAD" "OBSERVE WARNING SIGNS: STATE LAW") on the road, as well as that big yellow road-grader? Why did both teams stop and consider what to do when they saw the sign? Completion of the bridge would include the removal of those wouldn't it? 5. The "locals" are far, far different than the TIV for one big reason: they paid the taxes to build it. 6. If you don't "buy my story", why are you "spending" 
